Noncentral potential and Newton third law

In summary, the conversation revolves around a problem with a non-central potential and Newton's third law. The potential in question is the Yukawa potential, which is used in analytical bond order potential and is described by a complicated equation. The question at hand is whether the forces on a three-atom system connected in a triangle will sum up to zero, which is not the case. The conversation also discusses the conservation of linear momentum and the total potential energy of the system. The experts suggest using LaTeX for equations and provide a proof that the sum of the forces should be zero, but there seems to be an error somewhere in the calculations. The poster expresses gratitude for any help or guidance on the issue.
  • #1
yukawa_2006
3
0
Hello,
I was just searching online and discovered this great forum. Please I need help in sorting out a problem with a non-central potential and Newton third law.

This is not a physics homework problem. I'm a graduate student working on this equation as a reserch project and there are publications out there using this expression in "Analytical Bond order potential" by Pettiffor et al.
They call it Yukawa potential.

The form of the potential is:

(Sorry for the quakky expressions, I'm not sure if there is an equation editor on this forum, a guide will be appreciated).

U_ij = (A/r_ij)* exp(-S_ij(r_ij - r_c))

Where r_ij = sqrt((x_i - X_j)^2 + (y_i - Y_j)^2 + (z_I - z_j)^2)

or simply distance between atom i and atom j in cartesian coordinate

However,

S_ij = 1/2(S_i + S_j)

Where;
S_i = k_o + (sum(over k not equal to i) exp(-c*r_ik))

similarly

S_j = k_o + (sum(over k not equal to j) exp(-c*r_ jk))

Where r_ik and r_ jk are distances from atoms i to atom k
and the distance from atom j to atom k respectively.

This is the real question.
Suppose we have three atoms arranged in a triangle connected to each other where non of the distances between the triangle is the same; that is rij, rjk and rik are not the same.

We expect for three body system with no external forces in a closed system to have a conserved force. The forces should sum up to zero; That is

F_i = - (F_j + F_k).


I'm not sure if I'm doing something wrong here.:confused:

My problem is that the above energy expression is not giving a conserved forces that sum up to zero, especially when the environment of atoms i and j are different, That is, S_i is not equal l to S_j (when r_ij , r_ik and r_ jk are not all equal) and therefore F_i /= - F_ J so Newton third law of action and reaction are eqaul and opposite is violated.

Despite the fact that this force depend only on position, the system does not yield to conservation law.

The three atom in a triangle is the most trivial case, but the real problem actually involves many atoms surronding atoms i and j with different densities (S_i and S_ j ) in such a way that the force on atom i due to atom j is affected by other atoms k1_i, k2_i, k3_i, ... kn_i surrounding atom i.

While similarly the force on atom j due to atom i is affected by other atoms
k1_j, k2_j ...kn_j surrounding atom j.

I need to use this potential to derive the forces to perform molecular dynamics simulation and it's been a lot of headeache moving forward with this problem as the system will not conserve energy ( Give zero total force) in a close system.

Any help will be appreciated. Sorry for my long post, I'm just trying to make things clear. Thanks.
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #2
Wao! 21 view and no reply?

Am I in the wrong section?
 
  • #3
Hi Yukawa,

Welcome to Physics Forums!

First, the forum supports the use of LateX to make your equations look pretty. Just use the [ tex ] tag around an expression as in [tex] \textbf{F} = m \textbf{a} [/tex] (click to see the code).

Second, since the potential depends only on the coordinate differences between various atoms, the total momentum of the system must be conserved. This momentum is just the conserved quantity associated with the translation invariance of the Lagrangian (Noether's Thm). Unfortunately, it's not immediately apparent to me what is going wrong, but you should find that the forces do cancel. I imagine it's just an algebra error somewhere.

Third, that is one crazy potential!
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Physics Monkey said:
Hi Yukawa,

Welcome to Physics Forums!

First, the forum supports the use of LateX to make your equations look pretty. Just use the [ tex ] tag around an expression as in [tex] \textbf{F} = m \textbf{a} [/tex] (click to see the code).

Second, since the potential depends only on the coordinate differences between various atoms, the total momentum of the system must be conserved. This momentum is just the conserved quantity associated with the translation invariance of the Lagrangian (Noether's Thm). Unfortunately, it's not immediately apparent to me what is going wrong, but you should find that the forces do cancel.

Third, that is one crazy potential!

Hey thanks for the response.

Is it the Linear momentum that should be conserved in this case?

For the 3-body system example that I gave, the forces only cancels when r_ij and r_ik are the same or when all the three atoms are not connected in a triangle.

When all the three atoms are connected in a triangle, then the total force on the system is no longer zero. I have used the center of mass for the whole system to constrain the velocities to give zero total linear momentum with no success.

I just don't know what is going wrong here. The fundermental problem here is that when the environment of i and j are different, then the magnitude of the force on i is not equal to the force on j, but I do expect the total system force to sum up to zero which is also not happening here.

Any help as to what I'm doing wrong will be appreciated.
 
  • #5
Hi again yukawa,

Yes, it is the linear momentum of the system which is conserved.

I can give you a simple proof that the sum of the forces is zero. The total potential energy of the system is [tex] U = \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i \neq j} U_{i j} [/tex] (the 1/2 takes care of double counting). Note that this quantity depends only on the relative separation of the atoms because each [tex] U_{i j} [/tex] depends only on the relative separation. The force on the i-th atom is given by [tex] \vec{F}_i = - \nabla_i U [/tex], where [tex] \nabla_i [/tex] means derivative with respect to the coordinates of the i-th atom. This is, of course, nothing but the standard formula for force in terms of potential energy.

Now, in a system with N atoms, the sum of all the forces is [tex] \sum_{i = 1}^N \vec{F}_i = \sum_{i = 1}^N - \nabla_i U [/tex]. We need to show that this is zero irrespective of the positions of the atoms, etc. To do this, multiply both sides by an arbitrary vector [tex] \vec{a} [/tex]. The left hand side is just the dot product of [tex] \vec{a} [/tex] with the sum of all the forces. The right hand side looks like [tex] - \sum_i \vec{a}\cdot\nabla_i U [/tex], but we know what this term means. If [tex] \vec{a} [/tex] is small, this is nothing but the approximate difference between [tex] U(\vec{r}_i) [/tex] and [tex] U(\vec{r_i} + \vec{a}) [/tex].

Now we just have to realize that [tex] U [/tex] depends only on coordinate differences, so a shift of every coordinate by the same amount (by [tex] \vec{a} [/tex]) won't change the value of [tex] U [/tex]. Thus the right hand side is zero no matter what [tex] \vec{a} [/tex] is, and this means that left hand side must also be zero no matter what [tex] \vec{a} [/tex]. Now at last we see that [tex] \vec{a} \cdot \sum_i \vec{F}_i [/tex] can only be zero for all [tex] \vec{a} [/tex] if [tex] \sum_i \vec{F}_i = 0 [/tex]. This simple proof shows that the forces must sum to zero for your potential.

In practical terms: if you've found that the forces don't sum to zero, it means you've made some kind of algebra or differentiation error somewhere. That's about the best I can do unfortunately. I hope it helps some.
 
Last edited:

1. What is a noncentral potential?

A noncentral potential is a type of potential energy that does not depend solely on the distance between two objects. It also takes into account the relative positions and orientations of the objects with respect to each other.

2. How is noncentral potential related to Newton's third law?

Newton's third law states that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. In the case of noncentral potential, the force acting on one object due to the potential energy of the other object will have an equal and opposite force acting on the second object. This is because the potential energy is dependent on the relative positions and orientations of the objects.

3. Can noncentral potential be described by a simple mathematical equation?

No, noncentral potential is generally more complex and cannot be described by a simple equation. It often involves multiple variables and may require numerical methods to solve.

4. What are some examples of noncentral potential in real-world situations?

Some examples of noncentral potential include the gravitational potential of a rotating body, the potential energy of a dipole in an electric field, and the potential energy of a spinning top.

5. How does noncentral potential affect the motion of objects?

Noncentral potential can affect the motion of objects by introducing additional forces and changing the trajectories of their motion. It can also lead to more complex and interesting behavior, such as precession or oscillations, compared to purely central potentials.

Similar threads

  • Thermodynamics
Replies
28
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
5K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • Thermodynamics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Thermodynamics
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • Thermodynamics
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top